> Gary Winiger wrote:
> >>> Note that Sane and libsane was previously ARC'ed via LSARC
> >>>
> >>> http://sac.eng.sun.com/arc/LSARC/2007/018/
> >
> > Just what is the relationship between this case and the sited
> > LSARC case? Why is the LSARC case listed as a reference?
>
> The LSARC case proposed delivering more. In particular it had a daemon
> that provided remote scanner access. This case is just the library.
I'm looking for dependences here. In one hand we have
a stalled case that seems to have overlap.
> >> SANE does not depend on HAL for device access control.
> >
> > Why shouldn't it? Isn't it removable media?
>
> I don't understand why a scanner would be classed as removable media.
Because you put removable stuff in it and remove the stuff when
done. Solaris Object Reuse needs to be supported.
Gary..
